About your Search

20120928
20121006
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)
the technological responses. >> cenk: the other possibility they could redefine the source of value in a way a corollary or similar to what you suggested, making it class-based opportunity based affirmative action rather than race based. we understand using race is something that we cannot sanction under the constitution, but whether someone has had the full range of opportunity presented to him or her. is that a compromised position? >> it is a possibility, and universities like ucla have tried class-based affirmative action. the problem is it's not a perfect corollary forays, and universities find that they admit poor white kids as well and don't find it's as effective as affirmative action in getting minority applications. >> eliot: same-sex marriage are there votes to the right of same-sex marriage or will that strike down some of the federal statute that prohibits marriage for same-sex couples. >> i think your second session will be more likely. people think the court is more likely to rule before it takes up same-sex marriage. just as anthony kennedy has been siding strong with gay rig
of losers from this green technology stuff that the romney was saying he included tesla which is this fabulously growing electronic car company. mitt romney is a car guy somehow hates cars. he calls tesla a loser and wants detroit to go bankrupt. you don't get many softballs like that to hammer and the president was not in a hammering mood last night. i think we're going to see a different performance from him in the second debate. >> the owner of tesla owns space-x which launched the first successful private rocket to space. you know look, medicare is a great example of a well-run government program that now republicans seem to want to embrace. >> eliot: tim, to your metaphor of having a hammer, i think in the next debate, everything will look like a nail to the president. he will be swinging the hammer awfully fast and hard. at least i hope so. rolling stone national affairs tim dickinson. thank you, doug thornell for giving us a few extra minutes tonight. >> thank you. >> eliot: one more thing obama nee
to assist police in investigating crimes, things like that that technology now permits seem to be feasible and would thread the needle between the theoretical opposition you bring to it and those of us who say wait a minute, we've lived in urban environment where is the tragedy of gun violence as we saw in the ad is too great not to respond to it. i think the ad is powerful. we can all agree on that. it is an issue that should be debated. >> i think you two have a problem with your president. president obama doesn't support what you want to have happened. >> eliot: you're right. >> he doesn't want to talk about it. >> absolutely. >> he doesn't want to talk about it because he doesn't want to get into that philosophical debate because unfortunately the debate is polarized. once you say common sense gun control. you hear from people who say you want to take away all of my guns. unfortunately, in the debate, even though policywise, there is a middle ground in the rhetorical debate, there hasn't been a middle groun
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)